I think this argument is a bit specious. While taking steps to reduce the cost of energy may have an indirect effect on manufacturing in energy intensive indust

I think this argument is a bit specious. While taking steps to reduce the cost of energy may have an indirect effect on manufacturing in energy intensive industries, the main goal of this policy is to improve the bottom line of energy companies to the tune of billions of dollars. Companies which also happen to be huge campaign contributors. This would be like claiming that loosening the banking regulations was part of the Administration's plan to boost consumer spending, while ignoring the fact that it also helps those companies make billions of dollars more than they otherwise would have.